BC CARRER
Saved by @Alex1Powell

Thread: This brief @PilkingtonPhil note on Gunnar Myrdal's _Monetary Equilibrium_ is indeed very good. That work (which helped earn Myrdal the Nobel he shared w/ Hayek) Some follow-up remarks here.

 As Phil notes, Myrdal was a member of the Stockholm School, whose contributions to monetary theory built upon the work of Knut Wicksell, the school's founder. In By 1931, when _Monetary Equilibrium_ appeared, a (polite) rift had separated the school in two.
The rift began with a debate between Wicksell and David Davidson concerning the sort of price stability implied by a policy of keeping interest rates at their "natural" levels. Wicksell of course claimed that this would result in stable _output_ prices.
Davidson instead argued for a "productivity norm," with the stable factor prices, which would have the output price index move inversely with factor productivity.
Eli Heckscher and Gustav Cassel were among the more well-known Swedes who sided with Wicksell. Myrdal, in contrast, was , as did many those who sided with Davidson. (Hayek, by the way, also shared Davidson's opinion, as did many non-Swedes. See https://t.co/dlJQFqLbIL.)
Although many (myself among them) believe that the Davidson gang had the better arguments, the Riksbank ultimately went the (output) price-level stability route. David Laidler has an excellent paper on this: https://t.co/Th9MV1U3De. )See also https://t.co/LU6DUFi1gd)
One of Myrdal's particular contributions to the debate was his claim that stabilizing factor prices made more sense, because factor prices tend to be stickier than final goods prices. The less the former have to adjust, the fewer episodes of monetary disequilibrium.
As anyone conversant with the modern macro. literature knows, Davidson-Wicksell debate is still raging! https://t.co/uittss25vN
Phil addresses some important differences between Myrdal's analysis in _Monetary Equilibrium_ and that of Keynes's _General Theory_. One he doesn't point out is that Keynes took the Wicksellian view. But it's clear that Keynes's was torn on the issue.
As I've noted in comparing Keynes's position on this matter with Hayek's (Hayek's of the 1930s, that is), Keynes's came within an ace of embracing the Davidson "productivity norm" view: https://t.co/zTkGa1bwMW
Finally--and importantly--the productivity norm/factor price stability ideal amounts in practice to a form of nominal income targeting, and as such is akin to the NGDP targeting recommended by @MoneyIllusion, @DavidBeckworth, @MaMoMVPY, and others.
So I say we award ol' Gunnar an honorary NGDP targeting mug. How about it, @DavidBeckworth?

You May Also Like

Ethan \U0001f468\u200d\U0001f3a4
Ethan 👨‍🎤...
@Booligoosh
First update to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL since the challenge ended – Medium links!! Go add your Medium profile now 👀📝 (thanks @diannamallen for the suggestion 😁)


Just added Telegram links to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL too! Now you can provide a nice easy way for people to message you :)


Less than 1 hour since I started adding stuff to https://t.co/lDdqjtKTZL again, and profile pages are now responsive!!! 🥳 Check it out -> https://t.co/fVkEL4fu0L


Accounts page is now also responsive!! 📱✨


💪 I managed to make the whole site responsive in about an hour. On my roadmap I had it down as 4-5 hours!!! 🤘🤠🤘
MAKERS
Vibhu Vashisth
Vibhu Vashisth
@VIBHU_Tweet
THE MEANING, SIGNIFICANCE AND HISTORY OF SWASTIK

The Swastik is a geometrical figure and an ancient religious icon. Swastik has been Sanatan Dharma’s symbol of auspiciousness – mangalya since time immemorial.


The name swastika comes from Sanskrit (Devanagari: स्वस्तिक, pronounced: swastik) &denotes “conducive to wellbeing or auspicious”.
The word Swastik has a definite etymological origin in Sanskrit. It is derived from the roots su – meaning “well or auspicious” & as meaning “being”.


"सु अस्ति येन तत स्वस्तिकं"
Swastik is de symbol through which everything auspicios occurs

Scholars believe word’s origin in Vedas,known as Swasti mantra;

"🕉स्वस्ति ना इन्द्रो वृधश्रवाहा
स्वस्ति ना पूषा विश्ववेदाहा
स्वस्तिनास्तरक्ष्यो अरिश्तनेमिही
स्वस्तिनो बृहस्पतिर्दधातु"


It translates to," O famed Indra, redeem us. O Pusha, the beholder of all knowledge, redeem us. Redeem us O Garudji, of limitless speed and O Bruhaspati, redeem us".

SWASTIK’s COSMIC ORIGIN

The Swastika represents the living creation in the whole Cosmos.


Hindu astronomers divide the ecliptic circle of cosmos in 27 divisions called https://t.co/sLeuV1R2eQ this manner a cross forms in 4 directions in the celestial sky. At centre of this cross is Dhruva(Polestar). In a line from Dhruva, the stars known as Saptarishi can be observed.
ALL
Advertisement
Matt Fuller
Matt Fuller
@MEPFuller
They’re shooting into the chamber.
POLITICS
Dr Fish Philosopher Todd (Dr FPT)\U0001f41f
Dr Fish Philosopher To...
@ZoeSTodd
1. I was walking in the woods yesterday and I had an epiphany. It wasn’t one I wanted to have. I was thinking about today’s class, where we are reading Kimmerer’s ‘Gathering Moss’. I’ve taught Braiding Sweetgrass in multiple classes every year since 2016. It’s eminently teachable

2. Both books are beautifully written. Students uniformly enjoy them as assigned reading. They do a great job communicating to non-Indigenous folks the contours of basic Indigenous relationships to more-than-human beings. They’re wildly popular with white readers.

3. I’ve found Braiding Sweetgrass to be a great entry point for non-Indigenous folks to Indigenous scholarship. But this is where yesterday’s epiphany comes in. Neither Braiding Sweetgrass or Gathering Moss tends to the deep deep lineages of Indigenous scholarship in Canada or US

4. As the popularity of ‘Braiding Sweetgrass’ has soared, I’ve seen more and more white folks wax on about ‘braiding knowledge’. But they often don’t know any of the lineages of these concepts beyond what is presented in this one book. They confidently run with this.

5. Kimmerer does a commendable job of weaving in her own experiences, her family stories+nods to some very important knowledge keepers who deserve to be celebrated for their work. But Braiding Sweetgrass does not tend to the citational politics Sara Ahmed & others teach us about
SOCIETY
#OurFavOnlineDoc \U0001fa7a\U0001f1f3\U0001f1ec\U0001f1ec\U0001f1e7\U0001f48e
#OurFavOnlineDoc 🩺🇳🇬🇬🇧...
@DrOlufunmilayo
HELLO: If you pee and every time you finish, your urine looks like this picture, you may have a serious medical illness.

Foamy urine especially if it is persistent and noticeable over time may mean you have a serious kidney problem.

Let’s talk about this today...
RT for others.


What are the features of a normal urine?

A normal urine should have a light yellow colour, painless, odourless (or faint smell), steady stream and should ideally not foam when you pee.

When there’s something wrong, then you see changes in all the above normal features of urine.

For instance if urine becomes very deep yellow, it may mean you are dehydrated;

If urine becomes painful or smells really really bad, it may mean you have an infection;

If urine has a poor stream, especially in a man, it may mean a prostate problem like cancer.

Do you get me?

So today let’s talk about Foamy Urine.

What are the things that can cause urine to suddenly be foamy. As I said in the first tweet, it MAY mean a serious medical illness like a serious kidney problem.

First things first- it does NOT always mean a problem but it may as well.

Now what are the causes of Foamy Urine:

1. SPEED-
If you pee really fast or with a lot of force, it may make your urine more foamy than usual. The speed and force makes the urine generate a lot of bubbles which tend to almost quickly disappear as it is formed in the toilet bowl.
HEALTH